Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > alt.comp.os.windows-11 > #18520 > unrolled thread
| Started by | micky <NONONOmisc07@fmguy.com> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2025-04-19 22:34 -0400 |
| Last post | 2025-04-21 12:08 -0400 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 81 — 17 participants |
Back to article view | Back to alt.comp.os.windows-11
Mechanical or SSD for backup drive micky <NONONOmisc07@fmguy.com> - 2025-04-19 22:34 -0400
Re: Mechanical or SSD for backup drive Paul <nospam@needed.invalid> - 2025-04-20 03:48 -0400
Re: Mechanical or SSD for backup drive Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> - 2025-04-20 09:27 +0100
Re: Mechanical or SSD for backup drive Valerio Vanni <valerio.vanni@inwind.it> - 2025-04-20 11:50 +0200
Re: Mechanical or SSD for backup drive "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-04-20 20:23 +0200
Re: Mechanical or SSD for backup drive micky <NONONOmisc07@fmguy.com> - 2025-04-20 16:55 -0400
Re: Mechanical or SSD for backup drive "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-04-21 14:42 +0200
Re: Mechanical or SSD for backup drive micky <NONONOmisc07@fmguy.com> - 2025-04-21 21:22 -0400
Re: Mechanical or SSD for backup drive Daniel70 <daniel47@eternal-september.org> - 2025-04-22 20:15 +1000
Re: Mechanical or SSD for backup drive micky <NONONOmisc07@fmguy.com> - 2025-04-22 16:52 -0400
Re: Mechanical or SSD for backup drive Java Jive <java@evij.com.invalid> - 2025-04-23 00:37 +0100
Re: Mechanical or SSD for backup drive "Kerr-Mudd, John" <admin@127.0.0.1> - 2025-04-23 17:45 +0100
Re: Mechanical or SSD for backup drive Daniel70 <daniel47@eternal-september.org> - 2025-04-24 20:56 +1000
Re: Mechanical or SSD for backup drive "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-04-24 22:37 +0200
Re: Mechanical or SSD for backup drive micky <NONONOmisc07@fmguy.com> - 2025-04-24 21:48 -0400
Re: Mechanical or SSD for backup drive Paul <nospam@needed.invalid> - 2025-04-25 05:32 -0400
Re: Mechanical or SSD for backup drive Daniel70 <daniel47@eternal-september.org> - 2025-04-25 20:14 +1000
Re: Mechanical or SSD for backup drive "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-04-25 13:37 +0200
Re: Mechanical or SSD for backup drive Daniel70 <daniel47@eternal-september.org> - 2025-04-25 23:32 +1000
Re: Mechanical or SSD for backup drive "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-04-25 20:20 +0200
Re: Mechanical or SSD for backup drive "Kerr-Mudd, John" <admin@127.0.0.1> - 2025-04-25 22:02 +0100
Re: Mechanical or SSD for backup drive Daniel70 <daniel47@eternal-september.org> - 2025-04-26 19:44 +1000
Re: Mechanical or SSD for backup drive Daniel70 <daniel47@eternal-september.org> - 2025-04-26 21:00 +1000
Re: Mechanical or SSD for backup drive "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-04-26 20:07 +0200
Re: Mechanical or SSD for backup drive Paul <nospam@needed.invalid> - 2025-04-26 17:20 -0400
Re: Mechanical or SSD for backup drive "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-04-27 14:17 +0200
Re: Mechanical or SSD for backup drive Mark Lloyd <not.email@all.invalid> - 2025-04-26 19:24 +0000
Re: Mechanical or SSD for backup drive "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-04-26 22:28 +0200
Re: Mechanical or SSD for backup drive "Kerr-Mudd, John" <admin@127.0.0.1> - 2025-04-27 11:36 +0100
Re: Mechanical or SSD for backup drive Daniel70 <daniel47@eternal-september.org> - 2025-04-28 00:16 +1000
Re: Mechanical or SSD for backup drive "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-04-29 21:09 +0200
Re: Mechanical or SSD for backup drive Daniel70 <daniel47@eternal-september.org> - 2025-04-30 19:24 +1000
Re: Mechanical or SSD for backup drive "Kerr-Mudd, John" <admin@127.0.0.1> - 2025-04-30 20:20 +0100
Re: Mechanical or SSD for backup drive "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-04-29 21:18 +0200
Re: Mechanical or SSD for backup drive Java Jive <java@evij.com.invalid> - 2025-04-25 19:04 +0100
Re: Mechanical or SSD for backup drive "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-04-25 23:33 +0200
Re: Mechanical or SSD for backup drive Daniel70 <daniel47@eternal-september.org> - 2025-04-26 20:04 +1000
Re: Mechanical or SSD for backup drive Daniel70 <daniel47@eternal-september.org> - 2025-04-26 21:05 +1000
Re: Mechanical or SSD for backup drive Daniel70 <daniel47@eternal-september.org> - 2025-04-23 19:26 +1000
Re: Mechanical or SSD for backup drive Sam E <no.email@here.invalid> - 2025-04-22 23:00 +0000
Re: Mechanical or SSD for backup drive Java Jive <java@evij.com.invalid> - 2025-04-23 00:40 +0100
Re: Mechanical or SSD for backup drive Newyana2 <newyana@invalid.nospam> - 2025-04-20 07:15 -0400
Re: Mechanical or SSD for backup drive Paul <nospam@needed.invalid> - 2025-04-20 11:11 -0400
Re: Mechanical or SSD for backup drive Newyana2 <newyana@invalid.nospam> - 2025-04-20 12:08 -0400
Re: Mechanical or SSD for backup drive "...winston" <winstonmvp@gmail.com> - 2025-04-20 12:38 -0400
Re: Mechanical or SSD for backup drive "...winston" <winstonmvp@gmail.com> - 2025-04-20 12:31 -0400
Re: Mechanical or SSD for backup drive ant@zimage.comANT (Ant) - 2025-04-21 02:38 +0000
Re: Mechanical or SSD for backup drive Paul <nospam@needed.invalid> - 2025-04-21 03:52 -0400
Re: Mechanical or SSD for backup drive micky <NONONOmisc07@fmguy.com> - 2025-04-21 11:51 -0400
Re: Mechanical or SSD for backup drive Paul <nospam@needed.invalid> - 2025-04-21 21:13 -0400
Re: Mechanical or SSD for backup drive ant@zimage.comANT (Ant) - 2025-04-22 06:07 +0000
Re: Mechanical or SSD for backup drive Paul <nospam@needed.invalid> - 2025-04-22 05:34 -0400
Re: Mechanical or SSD for backup drive Newyana2 <newyana@invalid.nospam> - 2025-04-21 07:40 -0400
Re: Mechanical or SSD for backup drive Paul <nospam@needed.invalid> - 2025-04-21 09:12 -0400
Re: Mechanical or SSD for backup drive Java Jive <java@evij.com.invalid> - 2025-04-21 14:54 +0100
Re: Mechanical or SSD for backup drive Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> - 2025-04-21 15:29 +0100
Re: Mechanical or SSD for backup drive Java Jive <java@evij.com.invalid> - 2025-04-21 16:06 +0100
Re: Mechanical or SSD for backup drive Paul <nospam@needed.invalid> - 2025-04-21 17:45 -0400
Re: Mechanical or SSD for backup drive Java Jive <java@evij.com.invalid> - 2025-04-22 00:15 +0100
Re: Mechanical or SSD for backup drive Char Jackson <none@none.invalid> - 2025-04-21 23:01 -0500
Re: Mechanical or SSD for backup drive Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> - 2025-04-22 06:58 +0100
Re: Mechanical or SSD for backup drive Paul <nospam@needed.invalid> - 2025-04-22 05:47 -0400
Re: Mechanical or SSD for backup drive Char Jackson <none@none.invalid> - 2025-04-22 10:37 -0500
Re: Mechanical or SSD for backup drive Paul <nospam@needed.invalid> - 2025-04-22 14:34 -0400
Re: Mechanical or SSD for backup drive Newyana2 <newyana@invalid.nospam> - 2025-04-21 11:38 -0400
Re: Mechanical or SSD for backup drive Paul <nospam@needed.invalid> - 2025-04-21 18:29 -0400
Re: Mechanical or SSD for backup drive Newyana2 <newyana@invalid.nospam> - 2025-04-21 22:23 -0400
Re: Mechanical or SSD for backup drive Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> - 2025-04-21 14:05 +0000
Re: Mechanical or SSD for backup drive Mr Xi Ji Ping <ping@china.cn> - 2025-04-21 15:30 +0000
Re: Mechanical or SSD for backup drive "...winston" <winstonmvp@gmail.com> - 2025-04-21 11:28 -0400
Re: Mechanical or SSD for backup drive Daniel70 <daniel47@eternal-september.org> - 2025-05-15 21:33 +1000
Re: Mechanical or SSD for backup drive knuttle <keith_nuttle@yahoo.com> - 2025-05-15 07:41 -0400
Re: Mechanical or SSD for backup drive "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-05-15 14:06 +0200
Re: Mechanical or SSD for backup drive Paul <nospam@needed.invalid> - 2025-05-15 09:31 -0400
Re: Mechanical or SSD for backup drive Daniel70 <daniel47@eternal-september.org> - 2025-05-15 23:36 +1000
Re: Mechanical or SSD for backup drive ant@zimage.comANT (Ant) - 2025-05-15 23:26 +0000
Re: Mechanical or SSD for backup drive "...winston" <winstonmvp@gmail.com> - 2025-05-15 14:27 -0400
Re: Mechanical or SSD for backup drive Daniel70 <daniel47@eternal-september.org> - 2025-05-16 18:38 +1000
Re: Mechanical or SSD for backup drive Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> - 2025-05-16 14:51 +0000
Re: Mechanical or SSD for backup drive "...winston" <winstonmvp@gmail.com> - 2025-05-16 11:06 -0400
Re: Mechanical or SSD for backup drive micky <NONONOmisc07@fmguy.com> - 2025-04-21 12:08 -0400
Page 4 of 5 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 [4] 5 Next page →
| From | Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-04-22 06:58 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <m6oph1Fa9nkU1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #18577 |
Paul wrote: > While SAS exists and could in principle be put in your > home computer, I've yet to read an account where someone > claims they got a good result by doing this. The previous motherboard in my "server" had a single PCI-X slot (pre PCIe but wider and faster than PCI). I bought a cheapish 6 port SAS controller and used it with linux software RAID. I won't even try to find whatever performance tests I did years ago, but I remember it favourably, and couldn't find a newer motherboard with PCI-X
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Paul <nospam@needed.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-04-22 05:47 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <vu7oiv$b5ul$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #18586 |
On Tue, 4/22/2025 1:58 AM, Andy Burns wrote: > Paul wrote: > >> While SAS exists and could in principle be put in your >> home computer, I've yet to read an account where someone >> claims they got a good result by doing this. > > The previous motherboard in my "server" had a single PCI-X slot (pre PCIe but wider and faster than PCI). I bought a cheapish 6 port SAS controller and used it with linux software RAID. > > I won't even try to find whatever performance tests I did years ago, but I remember it favourably, and couldn't find a newer motherboard with PCI-X I'm referring to the people who took the "SATA compatibility" at face value, and they were attempting to run a SAS drive off a SATA port. The transfer rate did not seem to be correct, or the performance level varied while the device was running. I certainly was not interested in testing something like this :-) Some hair balls are best left, right where they are. I could juggle running chain saws as a hobby... but I don't. One hard drive that was recently retired, I opened it up. It was a 0.8" high Seagate. It had no plastic landing ramp. It had a patterned landing area near the hub, for the heads. You never really know what is inside those things, until you open them up and look. I had some 0.8" high drives at 500GB capacity, and those had lower-than-normal read/write in the second half of the disk. I didn't know what was going on. At some point, I offloaded the drive content, and re-wrote it from end to end (zeroed or whatever). Right after that, I tested, and the performance curve was back to normal. I put the content back on it. You always have to evaluate what you bought, a little bit, to better understand the company making the item. And whether they have your best interests at heart. Never assume anything. Paul
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Char Jackson <none@none.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-04-22 10:37 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <vjdf0k18mhdv7kbtbltq270bl7j5vj8ivk@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #18589 |
On Tue, 22 Apr 2025 05:47:12 -0400, Paul <nospam@needed.invalid> wrote: >On Tue, 4/22/2025 1:58 AM, Andy Burns wrote: >> Paul wrote: >> >>> While SAS exists and could in principle be put in your >>> home computer, I've yet to read an account where someone >>> claims they got a good result by doing this. >> >> The previous motherboard in my "server" had a single PCI-X slot (pre PCIe but wider and faster than PCI). I bought a cheapish 6 port SAS controller and used it with linux software RAID. >> >> I won't even try to find whatever performance tests I did years ago, but I remember it favourably, and couldn't find a newer motherboard with PCI-X > >I'm referring to the people who took the "SATA compatibility" >at face value, and they were attempting to run a SAS drive >off a SATA port. To the best of my knowledge, you can't run a SAS drive on a SATA port, but you can run a SATA drive on a SAS port. >The transfer rate did not seem to be correct, >or the performance level varied while the device was running. That sounds like a basic misunderstanding of the technology. SAS controller --> SATA drive = yes SATA controller --> SAS drive = no
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Paul <nospam@needed.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-04-22 14:34 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <vu8nge$15krv$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #18601 |
On Tue, 4/22/2025 11:37 AM, Char Jackson wrote:
> On Tue, 22 Apr 2025 05:47:12 -0400, Paul <nospam@needed.invalid> wrote:
>
>> On Tue, 4/22/2025 1:58 AM, Andy Burns wrote:
>>> Paul wrote:
>>>
>>>> While SAS exists and could in principle be put in your
>>>> home computer, I've yet to read an account where someone
>>>> claims they got a good result by doing this.
>>>
>>> The previous motherboard in my "server" had a single PCI-X slot (pre PCIe but wider and faster than PCI). I bought a cheapish 6 port SAS controller and used it with linux software RAID.
>>>
>>> I won't even try to find whatever performance tests I did years ago, but I remember it favourably, and couldn't find a newer motherboard with PCI-X
>>
>> I'm referring to the people who took the "SATA compatibility"
>> at face value, and they were attempting to run a SAS drive
>> off a SATA port.
>
> To the best of my knowledge, you can't run a SAS drive on a SATA port,
> but you can run a SATA drive on a SAS port.
>
>> The transfer rate did not seem to be correct,
>> or the performance level varied while the device was running.
>
> That sounds like a basic misunderstanding of the technology.
>
> SAS controller --> SATA drive = yes
> SATA controller --> SAS drive = no
>
The only reason I was reading the reviewers comments in this
case, this was back around the time Newegg started stocking
disk types that weren't appropriate for home computer users,
and without any warnings in the adverts. Then, apparently there was a high
rate of return on the things people were buying.
There seem to be a few more warnings today.
SATA 512e Home user
SATA 512n Home user
SATA 4Kn Will work at home, not recommended (tool situation not good)
SAS Not a drive you'd want at home particularly.
Many high performance drives, the self test "chirp" will drive you nuts.
A certain number of items are meant for locked server rooms.
Diff.SCSI Not a drive you'd want at home particularly.
I worked on a couple drives at work, one in one of our remote
labs, those were differential and the cables were 25 feet long
(and, all over the floor). But that was a long time ago, and
data rates were pretty low.
And the SCSI I've had in the house here, weren't really champs
either. Nothing really high rate. All I've got left in
SCSI here, is an async SCSI cable for the old scanner.
All my recent experience here is with SATA. And no 4Kn either.
Mostly 512e, a couple 512n.
Paul
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Newyana2 <newyana@invalid.nospam> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-04-21 11:38 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <vu5onr$2h6bu$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #18555 |
On 4/21/2025 9:12 AM, Paul wrote: > But with the drives themselves, you have to be pretty careful > these days with fraud. There are batches of drives seemingly > coming from Chia farms, where the odometer has been set back > on them. No problem. Just don't buy disks with grass growing on them. I've always hated those chia pets, anyway. :) I have an adapter gadget that I bought at one point when I was thinking of doing tech support on the side. It converts between SATA, IDE and USB, with a plug-in adapter for power. So I can hook up any drive via USB without a case. Though for largescale backup I'm more likely to plug it in internally, just long enough to copy over. A lot of people plug in external backup permanently, but that partially defeats the purpose. Backup means it's not connected. I have a redundant internal disk for on-machine backup.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Paul <nospam@needed.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-04-21 18:29 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <vu6gt3$35v34$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #18564 |
On Mon, 4/21/2025 11:38 AM, Newyana2 wrote: > On 4/21/2025 9:12 AM, Paul wrote: > >> But with the drives themselves, you have to be pretty careful >> these days with fraud. There are batches of drives seemingly >> coming from Chia farms, where the odometer has been set back >> on them. > > No problem. Just don't buy disks with grass growing on them. > I've always hated those chia pets, anyway. :) > > I have an adapter gadget that I bought at one > point when I was thinking of doing tech support > on the side. It converts between SATA, IDE and > USB, with a plug-in adapter for power. So I can hook > up any drive via USB without a case. Though for > largescale backup I'm more likely to plug it in internally, > just long enough to copy over. > > A lot of people plug in external backup permanently, > but that partially defeats the purpose. Backup means > it's not connected. I have a redundant internal disk for > on-machine backup. The reason you want your backup drive moved some distance from the PC, is in case of a lightning hit. This would be more of an issue for a person in Florida (according to an instructor at work, who flew up from Florida, and he happened to mention how he protects stuff at his house). The reason for wanting the backup drive not to share the same DC electrical supply (+5V, +12V from the PSU), is in case the PSU overvolts, and burns the controller board on both the main drive and the backup drive. when I mentioned that in a hardware group, a non-regular wrote on and said exactly that happened to him, PSU burned up all the storage in the box, via overvolting. This is also an issue for people running RAID10 and being smug about it - your PSU is a common-mode failure point and can burn the array (you know, that RAID array where you don't have any off-line backup stored safely). Paul
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Newyana2 <newyana@invalid.nospam> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-04-21 22:23 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <vu6ugu$3k7qs$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #18578 |
On 4/21/2025 6:29 PM, Paul wrote: > The reason you want your backup drive moved some distance from > the PC, is in case of a lightning hit. But also so that it's not connected if you get malware. USB *might* be safe from something like a surge, but leaving a backup drive connected means it's no longer a backup drive. It's just an addition.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-04-21 14:05 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <vu5qb4.poo.1@ID-201911.user.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #18520 |
micky <NONONOmisc07@fmguy.com> wrote: > The small 2 Terabyte WD Elements external backup drive I paid $60 for 4 > years ago is now $80. Didn't some guy do something with something called 'tariffs'!? :-) FWIW, my last disk purchase was also a 2TB WD Elements. Nice devices. > I thought computer stuff was supposed to get > cheaper with time!! (Well, that was last week. tonight it's down to > 70.) > https://www.amazon.com/dp/B06W55K9N6?ref_=ppx_hzsearch_conn_dt_b_fed_asin_title_2 > > It's mechanical. A solid state drive the same size is almost twice as > much. (The cheapest on Amazon is $112. Well, Vanzuny is 109, but I > never heard of Vanzuny.) > > 1) Would you spend almost twice as much for a drive just used for > backups? Speed is not an issue. The current one is plenty fast. And > damage is not an issue: I rarely go out of town and when I do I don't > take my bacup drive, although in the past they were 5 1/2" drives. Now > they are much smaller and I could if you told me I should.) No, I would not buy a SSD drive for backup and *did* take my 1TB WD Elements all over the world, several times, and also in a 4WD on highly corrugated dirt/gravel roads for hundreds of kilometres, no problem. > 2) Do you keep your backup files for an old computer, when you've copied > everythign to the newer computer? Since all the data files have been > copied to the new computer, I could, to save m money, erase the old > computer files and use it for the new one and I wouldn't have to buy a > new drive. Good idea? If you've really copied *everything* - not just what you thought of - you could delete the old copy, *after* you've made (full) backup of the new computer. I.e. at all times, you should have at least two copies of all your files, one on the active computer, one on a backup device. That said, before 'decomissioning' the old computer, I make - at least - a full image backup of it and keep *that*. So if I ever need anything from that old computer, and assuming that the same image backup/restore program (currently Macrium Reflect) (still) works on my current computer, I can still restore any file(s) I might need. FWIW, I currently have image backup of my two earlier computers (Vista and 8.1). Current computer is Windows 11.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Mr Xi Ji Ping <ping@china.cn> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-04-21 15:30 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <vu5nmd$3crd0$1@paganini.bofh.team> |
| In reply to | #18557 |
On 21/04/2025 15:05, Frank Slootweg wrote: > > Didn't some guy do something with something called 'tariffs'!? :-) > Tariffs might make some stuff cheap in some countries because China will try to dump surplus inventory. Unless the countries also try to block this. Ursula von der Leyen wants to block this but the customers are the king when it comes to buying things. Tariffs will only hurt United States more than countries willing to have fair trade policies with China. Let's face it Trump lost the battle and so he decided to pause everything until something is sorted out. China is in the driving seat because they know USA and Europe don't have the factories or necessary skills to start building their own stuff. China has young population and people are relatively educated and competitive. They are prepared to price themselves into work while in Europe and USA there is something called "minimum wage" and "welfare" and this makes it anti-competitive. There is no incentive to get a proper job!! In UK there are about 1 million people between the ages of 18 and 24 who have never worked in their lifetime. Now tell me who is going to employ these guys?
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "...winston" <winstonmvp@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-04-21 11:28 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <vu5o6n$2gma9$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #18557 |
Frank Slootweg wrote: > micky <NONONOmisc07@fmguy.com> wrote: >> The small 2 Terabyte WD Elements external backup drive I paid $60 for 4 >> years ago is now $80. > > Didn't some guy do something with something called 'tariffs'!? :-) > > FWIW, my last disk purchase was also a 2TB WD Elements. Nice devices. > >> I thought computer stuff was supposed to get >> cheaper with time!! (Well, that was last week. tonight it's down to >> 70.) >> https://www.amazon.com/dp/B06W55K9N6?ref_=ppx_hzsearch_conn_dt_b_fed_asin_title_2 >> >> It's mechanical. A solid state drive the same size is almost twice as >> much. (The cheapest on Amazon is $112. Well, Vanzuny is 109, but I >> never heard of Vanzuny.) >> >> 1) Would you spend almost twice as much for a drive just used for >> backups? Speed is not an issue. The current one is plenty fast. And >> damage is not an issue: I rarely go out of town and when I do I don't >> take my bacup drive, although in the past they were 5 1/2" drives. Now >> they are much smaller and I could if you told me I should.) > > No, I would not buy a SSD drive for backup and *did* take my 1TB WD > Elements all over the world, several times, and also in a 4WD on highly > corrugated dirt/gravel roads for hundreds of kilometres, no problem. > >> 2) Do you keep your backup files for an old computer, when you've copied >> everythign to the newer computer? Since all the data files have been >> copied to the new computer, I could, to save m money, erase the old >> computer files and use it for the new one and I wouldn't have to buy a >> new drive. Good idea? > > If you've really copied *everything* - not just what you thought of - > you could delete the old copy, *after* you've made (full) backup of the > new computer. I.e. at all times, you should have at least two copies of > all your files, one on the active computer, one on a backup device. > > That said, before 'decomissioning' the old computer, I make - at least > - a full image backup of it and keep *that*. So if I ever need anything > from that old computer, and assuming that the same image backup/restore > program (currently Macrium Reflect) (still) works on my current > computer, I can still restore any file(s) I might need. > > FWIW, I currently have image backup of my two earlier computers (Vista > and 8.1). Current computer is Windows 11. > Part of the price increase occurred shortly after the WD/SanDisk spinoff with each trading as separate stocks(Feb 2025) - WD retaining the HDD- side; SanDisk the SSD(Flash storage business). WD has an equity position in SanDisk. - Most searchable and valid links for WD's SSD products now redirect to SanDisk web site. W/R Old computer - image backups are a good idea. Also necessary to consider that an image backup may not have all desired/harvest-able data and other important files(program installers, music, photos) -- ...w¡ñ§±¤ñ
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Daniel70 <daniel47@eternal-september.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-05-15 21:33 +1000 |
| Message-ID | <1004jf2$33pf4$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #18563 |
On 22/04/2025 1:28 am, ...winston wrote: <Snip> > W/R Old computer > - image backups are a good idea. Also necessary to consider that an > image backup may not have all desired/harvest-able data and other > important files(program installers, music, photos) > Why NOT?? Surely an Image Back-up is an 'image' of the Drives File contents AT THAT TIME. -- Daniel70
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | knuttle <keith_nuttle@yahoo.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-05-15 07:41 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <1004jse$33mmt$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #19254 |
On 05/15/2025 7:33 AM, Daniel70 wrote: > On 22/04/2025 1:28 am, ...winston wrote: > > <Snip> > >> W/R Old computer >> - image backups are a good idea. Also necessary to consider that an >> image backup may not have all desired/harvest-able data and other >> important files(program installers, music, photos) >> > Why NOT?? Surely an Image Back-up is an 'image' of the Drives File > contents AT THAT TIME. While an image back up is good for a business, a data back up seems to be a better idea for the individual. By doing a data back up, in the worse case, the individual has a chance to review the software he has installed, and reinstall with a current version if he still needs that software. This is the same as moving to a new house. Since everything in the old house has to be removed, the move gives you a chance to review everything and throw out what you do not need any more.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-05-15 14:06 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <mu1hflxade.ln2@Telcontar.valinor> |
| In reply to | #19255 |
On 2025-05-15 13:41, knuttle wrote: > On 05/15/2025 7:33 AM, Daniel70 wrote: >> On 22/04/2025 1:28 am, ...winston wrote: >> >> <Snip> >> >>> W/R Old computer >>> - image backups are a good idea. Also necessary to consider that an >>> image backup may not have all desired/harvest-able data and other >>> important files(program installers, music, photos) >>> >> Why NOT?? Surely an Image Back-up is an 'image' of the Drives File >> contents AT THAT TIME. > While an image back up is good for a business, a data back up seems to > be a better idea for the individual. By doing a data back up, in the > worse case, the individual has a chance to review the software he has > installed, and reinstall with a current version if he still needs that > software. > > This is the same as moving to a new house. Since everything in the old > house has to be removed, the move gives you a chance to review > everything and throw out what you do not need any more. Even for individuals. An image backup, done when the computer is stable and clean, is very fast to restore. The strategy can be to complement with incremental file backups in between them. -- Cheers, Carlos.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Paul <nospam@needed.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-05-15 09:31 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <1004qb0$351oj$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #19255 |
On Thu, 5/15/2025 7:41 AM, knuttle wrote:
> On 05/15/2025 7:33 AM, Daniel70 wrote:
>> On 22/04/2025 1:28 am, ...winston wrote:
>>
>> <Snip>
>>
>>> W/R Old computer
>>> - image backups are a good idea. Also necessary to consider that an image backup may not have all desired/harvest-able data and other important files(program installers, music, photos)
>>>
>> Why NOT?? Surely an Image Back-up is an 'image' of the Drives File contents AT THAT TIME.
> While an image back up is good for a business, a data back up seems to be a better idea for the individual. By doing a data back up, in the worse case, the individual has a chance to review the software he has installed, and reinstall with a current version if he still needs that software.
>
> This is the same as moving to a new house. Since everything in the old house has to be removed, the move gives you a chance to review everything and throw out what you do not need any more.
Image files can be mounted, as if they are partitions.
[Picture]
https://i.postimg.cc/jj8zH4xm/backup-images-can-be-mounted-for-random-access.gif
In the example, C: was backed up via Macrium imaging,
that makes the MRIMG file, then you can select "Mount"
for the MRIMG and assign it a drive letter for temporary
read access (as K: ). If I needed to get a copy of files out
of my Downloads folder on K: , it takes no time at all
and does not require a "Restore".
Ghost may have had this first. Acronis has it. And so on.
The only one that does not make a point of pointing this
out, is the Windows 7 Backup provided by Microsoft. You can
do it, but the details are up to you to figure out. Maybe it
would work on Win11 Pro, with the right options enabled
in Windows Features (depends on whether files have
extension .vhd or .vhdx as to what to do).
*******
You can also mount a partition which exists inside a disk dump .img file.
That can be done with a loopback mount with offset, in Linux. On the Windows
side, you can gain access like that via 7ZIP. 7ZIP makes the partitions visible.
Depending on version that can work in a pretty slick fashion.
Paul
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Daniel70 <daniel47@eternal-september.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-05-15 23:36 +1000 |
| Message-ID | <1004qlj$353gu$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #19255 |
On 15/05/2025 9:41 pm, knuttle wrote: > On 05/15/2025 7:33 AM, Daniel70 wrote: >> On 22/04/2025 1:28 am, ...winston wrote: >> >> <Snip> >> >>> W/R Old computer >>> - image backups are a good idea. Also necessary to consider that an >>> image backup may not have all desired/harvest-able data and other >>> important files(program installers, music, photos) >>> >> Why NOT?? Surely an Image Back-up is an 'image' of the Drives File >> contents AT THAT TIME. > While an image back up is good for a business, a data back up seems to > be a better idea for the individual. By doing a data back up, in the > worse case, the individual has a chance to review the software he has > installed, and reinstall with a current version if he still needs that > software. .... which is, sort of, why I had my old Win7 Laptop set up the way I did. C:\ Drive was for Win7 System stuff. D:\ Drive was for executables *I* installed (Browser, LOffice, etc) E:\ Drive was for Data (e-mail, Letters, Games, etc) But so many programs wanted to go where THEY wanted to go, not where I wanted!! > This is the same as moving to a new house. Since everything in the old > house has to be removed, the move gives you a chance to review > everything and throw out what you do not need any more. Yeap! -- Daniel70
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | ant@zimage.comANT (Ant) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-05-15 23:26 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <1005t68$3c5jr$5@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #19258 |
In alt.comp.os.windows-10 Daniel70 <daniel47@eternal-september.org> wrote:
> On 15/05/2025 9:41 pm, knuttle wrote:
> > On 05/15/2025 7:33 AM, Daniel70 wrote:
> >> On 22/04/2025 1:28 am, ...winston wrote:
> >>
> >> <Snip>
> >>
> >>> W/R Old computer
> >>> - image backups are a good idea. Also necessary to consider that an
> >>> image backup may not have all desired/harvest-able data and other
> >>> important files(program installers, music, photos)
> >>>
> >> Why NOT?? Surely an Image Back-up is an 'image' of the Drives File
> >> contents AT THAT TIME.
> > While an image back up is good for a business, a data back up seems to
> > be a better idea for the individual. By doing a data back up, in the
> > worse case, the individual has a chance to review the software he has
> > installed, and reinstall with a current version if he still needs that
> > software.
> .... which is, sort of, why I had my old Win7 Laptop set up the way I did.
> C:\ Drive was for Win7 System stuff.
> D:\ Drive was for executables *I* installed (Browser, LOffice, etc)
> E:\ Drive was for Data (e-mail, Letters, Games, etc)
> But so many programs wanted to go where THEY wanted to go, not where I
> wanted!!
Yeah, annoying specially when they use shared files. I gave up and just
install softwares into C:\winstuff\programname if they let me. Also,
easier todo back ups and restores. All my data like works, medias, etc.
are on another drive.
--
"And you must love the Lord your God with all your heart, all your soul, and all your strength". --Deuteronomy 6:5. BUSY weekdays w. updates, spams, appts., works, etc.
Note: A fixed width font (Courier, Monospace, etc.) is required to see this signature correctly.
/\___/\ Ant(Dude) @ http://aqfl.net & http://antfarm.home.dhs.org.
/ /\ /\ \ Please nuke ANT if replying by e-mail.
| |o o| |
\ _ /
( )
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "...winston" <winstonmvp@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-05-15 14:27 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <1005bn9$38us9$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #19254 |
Daniel70 wrote: > On 22/04/2025 1:28 am, ...winston wrote: > > <Snip> > >> W/R Old computer >> - image backups are a good idea. Also necessary to consider that an >> image backup may not have all desired/harvest-able data and other >> important files(program installers, music, photos) >> > Why NOT?? Surely an Image Back-up is an 'image' of the Drives File > contents AT THAT TIME. Not every single user's system/device has everything on the main disk. - believing that every main disk holds everything(os/data/etc.) or that one's own device is like everyone else is too narrow, akin to tunnel vision. As noted earlier...image backups are a good idea but not necessarily all-inclusive. -- ...w¡ñ§±¤ñ
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Daniel70 <daniel47@eternal-september.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-05-16 18:38 +1000 |
| Message-ID | <1006tif$3m4k3$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #19260 |
On 16/05/2025 4:27 am, ...winston wrote: > Daniel70 wrote: >> On 22/04/2025 1:28 am, ...winston wrote: >> >> <Snip> >> >>> W/R Old computer >>> - image backups are a good idea. Also necessary to consider that an >>> image backup may not have all desired/harvest-able data and other >>> important files(program installers, music, photos) >>> >> Why NOT?? Surely an Image Back-up is an 'image' of the Drives File >> contents AT THAT TIME. > > Not every single user's system/device has everything on the main disk. In that case, 'they' shouldn't be talking about DISK (Main or Otherwise) but DISKS!! > - believing that every main disk holds everything(os/data/etc.) or that > one's own device is like everyone else is too narrow, akin to tunnel > vision. > > As noted earlier...image backups are a good idea but not necessarily > all-inclusive. > > -- Daniel70
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-05-16 14:51 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <1007qf5.ot0.1@ID-201911.user.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #19266 |
Daniel70 <daniel47@eternal-september.org> wrote: > On 16/05/2025 4:27 am, ...winston wrote: > > Daniel70 wrote: > >> On 22/04/2025 1:28 am, ...winston wrote: > >> > >> <Snip> > >> > >>> W/R Old computer > >>> - image backups are a good idea. Also necessary to consider that an > >>> image backup may not have all desired/harvest-able data and other > >>> important files(program installers, music, photos) > >>> > >> Why NOT?? Surely an Image Back-up is an 'image' of the Drives File > >> contents AT THAT TIME. > > > > Not every single user's system/device has everything on the main disk. > > In that case, 'they' shouldn't be talking about DISK (Main or Otherwise) > but DISKS!! Well, even for single disk systems, Winston's point still holds, because that single disk can have multiple (user) *partitions* and most image backup is partition-based, not diskdrive-based. So one might have a disk with muliple partitions, but only make image backup of the C: partition, not D:, etc.. And make file-level backup of D:, etc.. So Winston's point was just a warning, that's all. > > - believing that every main disk holds everything(os/data/etc.) or that > > one's own device is like everyone else is too narrow, akin to tunnel > > vision. > > > > As noted earlier...image backups are a good idea but not necessarily > > all-inclusive.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "...winston" <winstonmvp@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-05-16 11:06 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <1007k9t$3qp99$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #19266 |
Daniel70 wrote: > On 16/05/2025 4:27 am, ...winston wrote: >> Daniel70 wrote: >>> On 22/04/2025 1:28 am, ...winston wrote: >>> >>> <Snip> >>> >>>> W/R Old computer >>>> - image backups are a good idea. Also necessary to consider that >>>> an image backup may not have all desired/harvest-able data and other >>>> important files(program installers, music, photos) >>>> >>> Why NOT?? Surely an Image Back-up is an 'image' of the Drives File >>> contents AT THAT TIME. >> >> Not every single user's system/device has everything on the main disk. > > In that case, 'they' shouldn't be talking about DISK (Main or Otherwise) > but DISKS!! Who is 'they'? The original post, never clarified the number of disks or partitions on the number of disks. The original post never clearly clarified the type of content and the source type(disk, disks, SDXC card) stored(image, backup data) on the backup disk Subsequent posts alluded to multiple driver letters yet never clarifying partitions or other disks. Thus, until clarification...it remains premature to assume that all content is on a one single 'disk'. > >> - believing that every main disk holds everything(os/data/etc.) or >> that one's own device is like everyone else is too narrow, akin to >> tunnel vision. >> >> As noted earlier...image backups are a good idea but not necessarily >> all-inclusive. >> >> -- ...w¡ñ§±¤ñ
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 4 of 5 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 [4] 5 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | alt.comp.os.windows-11
csiph-web